I see a lot of conservative claptrap talking points in this thread (what a surprise). Are we *really* going to drag back out the "nobody wants to listen to liberal talk radio" line when there are innumerable conservative talk shows that are routinely beaten by Randi Rhodes, et al?
What's really happened (again) among the less-wise among us is the usual polemic of conservatives feeling that any potential success of liberal talk radio is immediately comparable with the acceptance or rejection of the doctrine. If Glenn Beck does lousy, that must somehow translate into the rejection of the conservative philosophy he spouts (instead of rejecting him for the synapse problems he regularly suffers from in stringing together two thoughts into one and bewildering everyone along the way). Or Randi Rhodes shows Bill O'Reilly the ratings door right before the 2004 election and John Kerry loses anyway.
This is a result of the incredibly shallow analysis some people perennially engage in around here with their personal playbooks. If you label it, you can define it as good or bad.
I just watched someone do that in the NYC board in a post that declared some sort of victory that "liberal Democrat" Lionel is being replaced by "conservative Republican" Marzberg. I wouldn't take that victory lap. First, Lionel isn't a liberal Democrat and second, Lionel had only good things to say about his replacement as he heads over to Air America.
I am particularly amused with the "top-secret" research one thread participant claims to have which he can use to make sweeping judgments about ... well, everything, but while he can make judgments, others who request the underlying facts are told they can't have them. Hmmm... that marks down the viability of the original argument to Dollar-Tree value. All based on a claim that there is scientific evidence that liberal talk radio can never have enough listeners. Well, my own "top secret" research tells me, without a doubt, that's just another talking point wrapped in a fortune cookie. The only thing left out was our lucky number for the day. Maybe that's a secret too.
I guess I am surprised that people will still float these logical Titanics around here and expect to have them just accepted. It literally gets childish - the equivalent in their minds that Rush Limbaugh is Ronald McDonald and Ed Schultz is the Hamburgler. An eternal battle of radio talk show good and evil.
The truth, which is amazingly easy to grasp when you shovel the talking points and playbook mentality out of the way, is that a radio show lives or dies based on how well it entertains and informs its listeners and what is competing for the attention of those listeners. To me, it's not really a big surprise that conservative talk radio is all over the AM dial considering the demographic that spends the most time listening to it - an older audience completely underserved by most of the rest of the radio dial, except some standards station somewhere. There is probably nothing on FM for these people at all. Where else are they going to go? For many of these people, it's AM political talk during the day and Fox News at night. Then they have to endure Ralph Snodsmith the garden guy on weekends, and he's not doing "Lilacs: Are they a liberal conspiracy?"
If you come on the air with a liberal or conservative talk show and harangue and bore your audience to tears, you will not have many listeners. If you entertain them, you will. And along the way in liberal talk, you'll learn what works (Stephanie Miller, Randi Rhodes, Ed Schultz), and what doesn't (Sam Seder, Jerry Springer).
You don't need a "secret study" to figure that out. And considering where the radio industry is today, in its ongoing slow bleeding, even if this report actually existed, I wouldn't be too quick to accept it as gospel if it comes from the same consultants that have left radio in the murky world of mediocrity that it seems to live in these days.
And you know you've reached the end of useful debate when the level of the discussion degrades to the point where someone drags out references to Pravda in a radio thread. That's like looking to the crazy guy on the subway yelling "who ordered the veal cutlet" for an informed and passionate debate on the merits of Kurt Vonnegut.
